Talk:Pinas Automobile
From denial to acception... Original :) 19:22, 22 January 2008 (UTC) :Thanks, but I guess you are familiar with the designs. 19:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC) ::Serious? I shouldn't know (denial is the first phaseThe first phase in the mourning-proces, according to Kubbler Ros., isn't it?) 19:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC) :::yep, followed by anger, merchandising ( = negociating), depression and excepting.The following four phases. 19:30, 22 January 2008 (UTC) ::::(I guess you mean accepting ) ::::So I'll be angry now... Yuri!!!! You bastard! Stop making Ford Automobiles without Henry's permission!! 19:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC) :::::I will start negociating with you as well with Henry!! Now you can start you depression!! 19:33, 22 January 2008 (UTC) :::::: :'( I'm leaving (oooo! I'm sooooo sad!)... 19:37, 22 January 2008 (UTC) ::::::: And know we all have to accept and let go, so we will become one big happy family 19:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC) Take over May I have this company? Pierlot McCrooke 13:07, August 14, 2010 (UTC) :Under one condition: no change in the company name or logo. The rest of the page's content is all yours. 13:14, August 14, 2010 (UTC) ::If I cant change the logo i will sell it back ( I had an logo idea for it) Pierlot McCrooke 13:18, August 14, 2010 (UTC) :::Too bad. 13:19, August 14, 2010 (UTC) Notes & References new models Yuri, you should update the model lineup, as I have with Vanguard. HORTON11 21:45, May 20, 2011 (UTC) :Maybe Vanguard is interested in taking over Pinas? Otherwise it will probably end up in a Chinese portfolio. I just want the name/logo to be maintained, all the models, company policies etc. may be altered. Wha'd ya say? 07:56, May 21, 2011 (UTC) ::Sure, Its just, the logo is fine but not very suited for a car company. But we can work with that and try to make Pinas "fun again". HORTON11 22:51, May 21, 2011 (UTC) :::If it's okay with you i'll start introducing new models. BTW do you think it is viable to start a Lovian auto show or award? HORTON11 22:57, May 21, 2011 (UTC) ::::I don't see why not? I'm not really nuts for cars but such an event could stimulate the car industry - as well as 'green' innovations in the sector. 07:39, May 22, 2011 (UTC) I've reverted the takeover as I think a car brand is a good thing to be affiliated with other manufacturing companies, as part of Ecompany. Besides, Vanguard controls PLENTY of car companies, and it doesn't need any more. I will, however, keep the new models. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 21:11, October 10, 2011 (UTC) :What I mean by plenty is that with six brands Vanguard already has three times as many brands as an Asian car company, so it's unrealistic. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 21:12, October 10, 2011 (UTC) ::Yuri gave Pinas to me to add as part of Vanguard Group, so there's no need to take it away. HORTON11 21:29, October 10, 2011 (UTC) :::I'll have to appeal it then. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 21:33, October 10, 2011 (UTC) ::::This is a private company, and anyways this is not a communist country where everything is state-owned. Also Pinas (and car companies in general) do better if they are together with other like-minded auto brands. HORTON11 21:35, October 10, 2011 (UTC) :::::What makes it a private company, and why do you want everything to be private so that you can be the top entrepreneur for so many things? Anyway, I did note that only the energy and water components are state owned. Also, look at the 2011 Second Congress, we are a communist country. I think a little competition is okay, especially if Pinas is being supported by a larger company like Ecompany. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 21:38, October 10, 2011 (UTC) ::::::I'd say more socialist. And you're a liberal, you should be against nationalization. And no I do not want to be a top entrepreneur. VG is indepndent from many of my companies. If you want we can make VG a division of Ecompany, just keep the group together. HORTON11 21:44, October 10, 2011 (UTC) :::::::Krosby is a centrist leaning left, but out of Krosby I'm actually more of a regular leftist. I think VG should stay independent but I want Ecompany to have an automobile company be part of it, and since Pinas was in it originally, I wanted Pinas, but if you REALLY want Pinas in VG then I will use the old Espada or another one. Although, I REALLY want Pinas for Ecompany. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 21:48, October 10, 2011 (UTC) Ecompany is more about electricity and energy, so car manufacturing does not really suit it. And I really do want Pinas to remain with VG, it makes the most sense. You can have Espada, but I realized it does not make too much sense for Lovia to have a luxury-car brand, since that market is very hard to become mainstream in. HORTON11 21:54, October 10, 2011 (UTC) Maybe, but Vanguard already has five brands, and now Ecompany has none. Ecompany also has three companies that would contribute to a car company -- gas, oil, and steel, which can all be found in cars. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 21:59, October 10, 2011 (UTC) @TimeMaster/Horton: maybe a compromise is possible? I think both Vanguard and Ecompany need to be slimmed down. My proposal: Ecompany becomes the name of a holding with in it a private pillar (steel, etc.) and some government-controlled service providers (electricity, water, etc.). Vanguard will also become a holding, but one with different pillars organized according to company occupation. In addition, Vanguard OR replaces Pinas back to Ecompany OR merges its car companies and gives the remaining name to Ecompany. Compromise? 05:56, October 11, 2011 (UTC) I proposed to Timemaster to make VG a division of Ecompany. Well Yuri if VG is kept intact as part of Ecompany (and I can introduce new models ocasionally) it would be fine. HORTON11 06:01, October 11, 2011 (UTC) So can anyone agree to this: * Ecompany Holding ** Public pillar: Public Energy Company (former 'Ecompany'), Public Water Company (to be created), National Bank (former Aventis) ** Privater pillar: Lovineft petrochemical, Adamas steel, Vanguard motors (former VG, with brands like Atlantis and Pinas) The Lovian state will be responsible for the public pillar, the private pillar is divided amongst Ecompany and Vanguard shareholders. The board of directors for the holding should be headed by an Ecompany president + delegates for the public pillar and Vanguard. 06:11, October 11, 2011 (UTC) Sounds good. HORTON11 06:20, October 11, 2011 (UTC)